MIME-Version: 1.0
References: 
 <CAHut+PvikGr4AtoFSs=jq=hmTybVF2NCMEZ57-sjwbGudfuqsQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <9FE5AA84-F1A1-4E1C-8EF8-3AFD6C46B318@gmail.com>
 <CAHut+PsUQfddBnjE9m1x4aoWAgRMEnsVFeg2cZJt9BCC_nbwfg@mail.gmail.com>
 <0B7E46E8-EA1B-48AA-A1A5-BC39B5073D40@gmail.com>
 <CAHut+PuxV8wAULnNv+i1_YKyvDrD7jvWne48Yf82e3hRR=+qQw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABV9wwPNeMM9wrtYtwmG_F6y=-f8hcnPbeVMmgXE4DEaZkFQew@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHut+PsdwfnT3yMM8r9y7c5MZU2sv27JJd2riFipdQ8PvXs7Dw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAHut+PsdwfnT3yMM8r9y7c5MZU2sv27JJd2riFipdQ8PvXs7Dw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2026 16:58:28 +0530
Message-ID: 
 <CAA4eK1JmqgZQ9HRvF6t7Eie6Z4sDGAEyH5fYbt1F69tvwLFUdQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Add missing period to HINT messages
To: Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Treat <rob@xzilla.net>, Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1JmqgZQ9HRvF6t7Eie6Z4sDGAEyH5fYbt1F69tvwLFUdQ%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Apr 13, 2026 at 6:32=E2=80=AFAM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>=
 wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2026 at 11:10=E2=80=AFPM Robert Treat <rob@xzilla.net> wr=
ote:
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 9, 2026 at 9:05=E2=80=AFPM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.c=
om> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 9, 2026 at 1:34=E2=80=AFPM Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.co=
m> wrote:
> > > >
> > > ...
> > > >
> > > > I am not sure if your scope includes contrib/, if yes, I am sure yo=
u will find some occurrences there.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Updated one more message found in contrib.
> > >
> > > PSA v2.
> > >
> >
> > +1 to the general idea here, although at the risk of looking at
> > patches before the morning coffee has settled in, ISTM you might have
> > missed some entries? And/or this patch isn't against HEAD?  For
> > example, you seem to be catching the line here
> > https://github.com/postgres/postgres/blame/009ea1b08d7b8843435bd0f1137f=
a3df09aac79f/src/test/regress/expected/partition_split.out#L60,
> > but not the one on line 52, maybe because it looks like a comment (but
> > istm we should clean these all up. no?)
> >
>
> Thanks for your review!
>
> Yes, the patch applies to HEAD. It looks like I was a bit slack in
> updating some test comments. Hopefully, I have found them all now.
>

BTW, I find such a code cleanup exercise can be done even after
feature freeze. If so, shall we do it as a HEAD-only patch or do it in
bank branches as well?

--=20
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.